Government has responded to the petition

The Government has responded to the petition you signed    “Save our Bass: do not water down the proposal to ban nets”

 

Government responded:

The UK secured emergency measures to conserve bass in 2015. For 2017 we sought a package to reduce commercial catches, minimise discards and argued for proportionate allowance for recreational angling

At this year’s December Council negotiation the UK sought a balanced package on sea bass that further protected the stock, while respecting the need to account for discards and allow some continued recreational angling. We pressed for a better deal for angling, recognising its importance to local economies. In particular, we agreed that there should be a 1 or 2 fish bag limit for 10 months of the year and argued for lower commercial catch limits. We were disappointed we could not move beyond the current scheme and agree a fairer package for anglers.

Bass measures agreed at December Council included:

  • The limit tightened for bass catches by fixed gill nets from 1.3 tonnes to 250kg per vessel per month, with a closed season of February-March, representing an 80% cut from this year’s provision, and for all forms of netting at UK level an estimated 88% cut from the former 2011-2013 baseline annual average;
  • No provision for other forms of netting than fixed gill net;
  • Setting the limit for hook and line fisheries at 10 tonnes per annum (spread across ten months of the year), reducing the catch potential by 23%;
  • Setting the by-catch provision for trawlers and seines at 3% per day. This is an increase from 1% per trip for this year to minimise bass discards, but with a new cap introduced of 400kg per month. At UK level the provision is estimated to result in a 57% decrease from the former 2011-13 baseline average.
  • The provision for recreational angling remains unchanged, with only catch and release allowed in the first six months, followed by a daily limit of one fish per fisher.

 

We are making progress in reducing bass catches at EU level and are heading in the right direction in terms of stock recovery. We will continue to seek the right balance between the legitimate interests of the recreational and commercial sectors while achieving sustainable fisheries for bass.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Click this link to view the response online

:

Thanks,

The Petitions team

UK Government and Parliament

 

 

Bass Protest Logo SOS Bass click Here

Contact Us info@saveourseabass.org

8 Comments
  1. “• The limit tightened for bass catches by fixed gill nets from 1.3 tonnes to 250kg per vessel per month, with a closed season of February-March, representing an 80% cut from this year’s provision, and for all forms of netting at UK level an estimated 88% cut”

    No it hasn’t been reduced.

    They (like many will through ignorance or on purpose) have misunderstood the difference between a vessel catch limit and a bycatch allowance.

    A VCL puts a limit on the catch.

    A bycatch allowance allows the landing of fish caught incidentally and UNAVOIDABLY when targeting something else.

    From 1st Jan it will be illegal to target bass with nets or any other method than by hook and line.

    Targeted netting for bass will be illegal.

  2. The Government then accepts these measures are unfair to U.K. Recreational anglers? I am a sport fisherman who has always carried out partial catch and release on the bass I catch taking a few fish for my own table. My boat is moored next to a commercial rod an liner. We fish the same marks, during April,may,June he catches as many as he can and takes every one. I fish alongside him and can’t take a few fish home for my families tea. As you accept an unfair law. A life long conservative voter who will never vote that way again. Unfair law is bad law, ten fish a month was proposed, I was more than happy to keep records or tag fish but you did not support this proposal so you do not tell the truth when you say that the government argued for a better deal for recreational anglers. A blatant lie.

  3. Seeing that commercial landing bass must be hard to take Peter.

    Just to clarify the words above are the governments response to the petition. So when you say: “I was more than happy to keep records or tag fish but you did not support this proposal so you do not tell the truth when you say that the government argued for a better deal for recreational anglers. A blatant lie.” I assume you refer to the government statement and therefore the government and not BASS.

    The word was that 10 fish a month was deemed enforceforcable by ministers so changed, however they have compromised on netting and introduced bycatch allowance of 3% for commercials with a 250kg pcm maximum which is equally hard ( or impossible) to enforce. No consistency and they continue to fail to act in the best interest of the stock by watering down the scientific advice.

  4. There should be a total ban on commercial fishing for bass and a one fish limit for recreational fishing.
    If the bass stocks are so endangered then this is the only solution. We either need to sort the problem and not skirt around the edges and I believe most anglers would support this and play by the rules

  5. Once again our politicians fail us. Are they telling us the truth, or was this just another blatant ripoff to keep their greedy noses in the trough on the gravy train.
    I have seen over the 47 years I have had the great fortune to fish, an ever decreasing fish population. Not only bass but all species, unfortunately bass seems one of the most hard hit of all.
    The politicians must remember they are the servants of those who put them in their privileged position and are the same people who have the power to remove them.
    If they are not fit to negotiate on our behalf we need to replace them with others who are.

  6. When I pressed a Conservative politician about the slow pace of change on bass some years ago, on one occasion he offered ” Anglers aren’t very organized” and on another something about ” resource issues being very emotive.”

    He has done very well for himself since then presumably by avoiding emotive resource issues and by waiting for anglers to get themselves organized on bass.

  7. DRIFT GILL NETTING FOR MULLET IT IS THEN OR FIXED NETS WITH NOT ENOUGH WEIGHT SO THEY DRIFT , COUPLE OF RODS ONBOARD AND FREEDOM TO TAKE 1250 KG OF BASS PER MONTH ,SOUNDS VERY MUCH THE SAME AS LAST YEAR TO ME ,HOW CAN ANYONE PROVE AND ENFORCE THAT A BASS HASNT BEEN CAUGHT ON A ROD AND LINE WHEN COMING BACK TO SHORE ON A COMMERCIAL BOAT .RECREATIONAL ANGLERS SHAFTED AGAIN ,AMD MAKES ME SICK AFTER RELEASING OVER 300 BACK THIS SEASON UPTO 9LB AND THOUSANDS OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS ,JUST TO SEE GOVERNMENT LAWS WHICH ARE THERE TO BE EXPLOITED ONCE AGAIN WITH EASE ,LABOUR DESTROYED THE HUNTING AND CONSERVATIVE ARE DESTROYING THE BASS YEAR AFTER YEAR UNTIL THEY WILL BE ALL GONE FOR GOOD ,

  8. Recreational anglers have an insignificant effect on bass stocks. Our motivations for fishing are very different one is money driven the other a leisure activity. Anglers have a tiny fraction of the time and capacity to make any impact of fish stocks. How we’ve been drawn into the problem and been identified as needing to contribute to the solution is beyond me. I think we’ve put our head above the parapet and offered ourselves up as scapegoats for incompetent fisheries management.Watch out for further off the mark legislation such as licensing, bag limits and closed seasons applying to our activities. It will look to those who don’t understand like government is coming up with new ways to address mismanaged fish stocks.

Leave a Reply